Skip to main content
Log in

Evolution of Sexual Size Dimorphism in a Frog Obeys the Inverse of Rensch’s Rule

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Evolutionary Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Rensch’s rule refers to a pattern in sexual size dimorphism (SSD) in which SSD increases with body size when males are the larger sex and decreases with body size when females are the larger sex. Using data on body size from 40 populations and age from 31 populations of the rice frog Rana limnochari with female-biased size dimorphism, I tested the consistency of allometric relationships between males and females with Rensch’s rule and evaluated the hypothesis that SSD was largely a function of age differences between the sexes. Statistical comparisons of body sizes between the sexes showed the evidence for the inverse of Rensch’s rule, indicating the level of SSD increased with increasing mean body size. One of the explanations for the occurrence of the inverse of Rensch’s rule may be the fecundity selection hypothesis assuming increased reproductive output in large females. However, differences in age between males and females among populations could explain mildly the variation in SSD.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abouheif, E., & Fairbairn, D. J. (1997). A comparative analysis of allometry for sexual size dimorphism: Assessing Rensch’s rule. American Naturalist, 149, 540–562.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersson, M. (1994). Sexual selection. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berven, K. A. (1982). The genetic basis of altitudinal variation in the wood frog Rana sylvatica. An experimental analysis of life history traits. Evolution, 36, 962–983.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blanckenhorn, W. U. (2000). The evolution of body size: What keeps organisms small? Quarterly Review of Biology, 75, 385–407.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Blanckenhorn, W. U. (2005). Behavioural causes and consequences of sexual size dimorphism. Ethology, 111, 977–1016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boucher, S., Crete, M., Ouellet, J. P., Daigle, C., & Lesage, L. (2004). Large-scale trophic interactions: White-tailed deer growth and forest understory. Ecoscience, 11, 286–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castanet, J., & Cheylan, M. (1979). Les marques de croissance des os et des écailles comme indicateur de l’âge chez Testudo hermanni et Testudo graeca (Reptilia, Chelonia, Testudinidae). Canadian Journal of Zoology, 57, 1649–1665.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colwell, R. K. (2000). Rensch’s rule crosses the line: Convergent allometry of sexual size dimorphism in hummingbirds and flower mites. American Naturalist, 156, 495–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, R. M., Kelly, S. L., & John-Adler, H. B. (2003). A comparative test of adaptive hypotheses for sexual size dimorphism in lizards. Evolution, 57, 1653–1669.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dale, J., Dunn, P. O., Figuerola, J., Lislevand, T., Székely, T., & Whittingham, L. A. (2007). Sexual selection explains Rensch’s rule of allometry for sexual size dimorphism. Proceeding of Royal Society London B, 274, 2971–2979.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fairbairn, D. J. (1997). Allometry for sexual size dimorphism: Pattern and process in the coevolution of body size in males and females. Annul Review Ecology and Systematics, 28, 659–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fairbairn, D., Blanckenhorn, W., & Székely, T. (2007). Sex, size and gender roles. Evolutionary studies of sexual size dimorphism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hemelaar, A. S. M. (1981). Age distribution of male Bufo bufo (Amphibia: Anura) from the Netherlands, based on year rings in phalanges. Amphib-Reptilia, 1, 223–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herczeg, G., Gonda, A., & Merilä, J. (2010). Rensch’s rule inverted—female-driven gigantismin nine-spined stickleback Pungitius pungitius. Journal of Animal Ecology, 79, 581–588.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lengkeek, W., Didderen, K., Cote, I. M., van der Zee, E. M., Snook, R. C., & Reynolds, J. D. (2008). Plasticity in sexual size dimorphism and Rensch’s rule in mediterranean blennies (Blenniidae). Canadian Journal of Zoology, 86, 1173–1178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, Y. M., Xu, F., Guo, Z. W., Liu, X., Jin, C. N., Wang, Y. P., et al. (2011). Reduced predator species richness drives the body gigantism of a frog species on the Zhoushan Archipelago in China. Journal of Animal Ecology, 80, 171–172.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Liao, W. B. (2011). A skeletochronlogical estimate of age in a population of the Siberian Wood Frog, Rana amurensis, from northeastern China. Acta Herpetological, 6, 237–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liao, W. B., & Chen, W. (2012). Inverse Rensch-rule in a frog with female-biased sexual size dimorphism. Naturwissenschaften, 99, 427–431.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Liao, W. B., & Lu, X. (2010a). Age structure and body size of the Chuanxi tree frog Hyla annectans chuanxiensis from two different elevations in Sichuan (China). Zoologischer Anzeiger, 248, 255–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liao, W. B., & Lu, X. (2010b). A skeletochronlogical estimation of age and body size by the Sichuan torrent frog (Amolops mantzorum) between two populations at different altitudes. Animal Biology, 60, 479–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liao, W. B., & Lu, X. (2011). Variation in body size, age and growth in the Omei Treefrog (Rhacophorus omeimontis) along an altitudinal gradient in western China. Ethology Ecology and Evolution, 23, 248–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liao, W. B., & Lu, X. (2012). Adult body size = f (initial size + growth rate × age): Explaining the proximate cause of Bergman’s cline in a toad along altitudinal gradients. Evolutionary Ecology, 26, 579–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liao, W. B., Lu, X., Shen, Y. W., & Hu, J. C. (2011). Age structure and body size of two populations of the rice frog Rana limnocharis from different altitudes. Italian Journal of Zoology, 78, 215–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liao, W. B., Zhou, C. Q., Yang, Z. S., Hu, J. C., & Lu, X. (2010). Age, size and growth in two populations of the dark-spotted frog Rana nigromaculata at different altitudes in southwestern China. Herpetological Journal, 20, 77–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Y. H., Liao, W. B., Zhou, C. Q., & Mi, Z. P. (2012). Altitudinal variation in body size in the Rice Frog (Rana limnocharis) in southwestern China. Acta Herpetological, 7, 57–68.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lou, S. L., Jin, L., Liu, Y. H., Mi, Z. P., Tao, G., Tang, Y. M., et al. (2012). Altitudinal variation in age and body size in Yunnan Pond Frog (Pelophylax pleuraden). Zoological Science, 29, 493–498.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Monnet, J. M., & Cherry, M. I. (2002). Sexual size dimorphism in anurans. Proceeding of Royal Society London B, 269, 2301–2307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polák, J., & Frynta, D. (2009). Sexual size dimorphism in domestic goats, sheep, and their wild relatives. Biological Journal of Linnean Society, 98, 872–883.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polák, J., & Frynta, D. (2010). Patterns of sexual size dimorphism in cattle breeds support Rensch’s rule. Evolutionary Ecology, 24, 1255–1266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Remeš, V., & Székely, T. (2010). Domestic chickens defy Rensch’s rule: Sexual size dimorphism in chicken breeds. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 23, 2754–2759.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rensch, B. (1960). Evolution above the species level. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shi, L. Q., Zhang, X. Q., & Ma, X. M. (2011). Ontogeny in sexual dimorphism and female reproduction of rice frog Fejervarya limnocharis. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 30, 717–723.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shine, R. (1979). Sexual selection and sexual dimorphism in the amphibia. Copeia, 1979, 297–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shou, H. L., Du, W. G., & Shu, L. (2005). Sexual dimorphism and fecundity in the gold-stripe pond frog (Pelophylax plancyi) and the terrestrial frog (Fejervarya limnocharis). Acta Ecological Sinca, 25, 664–668.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, R. J. (1999). Statistics of sexual size dimorphism. Journal of Human Evolution, 36, 423–459.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, R. J., & Cheverud, J. M. (2002). Scaling of sexual dimorphism in body mass: A phylogenetic analysis of Rensch’s rule in primates. International Journal of Primatology, 23, 1095–1135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sokal, R. R., & Rohlf, F. J. (1981). Biometry: The principles and practice of statistics in biological research. Freeman, WH. San Francisco.

  • Starostová, Z., Kubička, L., & Kratochvíl, L. (2010). Macroevolutionary pattern of sexual size dimorphism in geckos corresponds to intraspecific temperature-induced variation. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 23, 670–677.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stephens, P. R., & Wiens, J. J. (2009). Evolution of sexual size dimorphisms in Emydid turtles: Ecological dimorphism, Rensch’s rule, and sympatric divergence. Evolution, 63, 910–925.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stuart-Fox, D. (2009). A test of Rensch’s rule in dwarf chameleons (Bradypodion spp.), a group with female-biased sexual size dimorphism. Evolutionary Ecology, 23, 425–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Székely, T., Freckleton, R. B., & Reynolds, J. D. (2004). Sexual selection explains Rensch’s rule of size dimorphism in shorebirds. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101, 12224–12227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tubaro, P. L., & Bertelli, S. (2003). Female-biased sexual size dimorphism in tinamous: A comparative test fails to support Rensch’s rule. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 80, 519–527.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb, T. J., & Freckleton, R. P. (2007). Only half right: Species with female-biased sexual size dimorphism consistently break Rensch’s rule. PLoS ONE, 2, e897.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • West, S. (2009). Sex allocation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, Z. J., Li, Y. M., & Murray, B. (2006). Insular shifts in body size of rice frogs in the Zhoushan Archipelago. Journal of Animal Ecology, 75, 1071–1080.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Xiong, H. L., Liu, Y., Qin, L. J., & Xiong, Z. B. (2010). Breeding ecology of Fejervarya multistriata in Maolan Region. Sichuan Journal of Zoology, 29, 353–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zamudio, K. R. (1998). The evolution of female-biased sexual size dimorphism: A population-level comparative study in horned lizards (Phrynosoma). Evolution, 52, 1821–1833.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, L. X., & Lu, X. (2012). Sexual size dimorphism in anurans: ontogenetic determination revealed by an across-species comparison. Evolutionary Biology. doi:10.1007/s11692-012-9187-2.

Download references

Acknowledgments

I thank Sang Lin Lou, Long Jin, Yu Mei Tang, Gang Tao, Yan Hong Lou and Wen Cao Liu for assistance during the field and lab work. I also thank two anonymous reviewers for critical comments on an earlier draft of this manuscript. Financial support was provided by the National Natural Sciences Foundation of China (31101633) and Innovative Team Foundation of China West Normal University.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wen Bo Liao.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Liao, W.B. Evolution of Sexual Size Dimorphism in a Frog Obeys the Inverse of Rensch’s Rule. Evol Biol 40, 293–299 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11692-012-9212-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11692-012-9212-5

Keywords

Navigation